and many more benefits!

Find us on Facebook

GMAT Club Timer Informer

Hi GMATClubber!

Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:

Show Tags

03 May 2014, 04:17

Hello guys,

I have recently bought 6 Veritas tests and I really like their content. What surprises me is the scores I receive. For the third tests I have got 790 and for the 4th test my score was 800!!!! I am nod bad in quant and constantly score 50/51 in all tests (except MGMAT CATS), but what frustrates me is the verbal score. How can I get 49 and 51 in verbal after missing 8 and 5 questions respectively? By the way, can someone tell me whether Veritas scores are a good proxy for the real test score.

Show Tags

03 May 2014, 21:29

Thank you for the reply

I have taken two free prep tests, and scored 760 and 740 respectively. But this was before going through the GMAT club and Veritas tests. I am sure that now I am doing significantly better. Anyway, this 790 and 800 are killing me On the Veritas web site is is clearly stated that 80% of the students report that the real thing was withing 30 points of their best score, so I think I can hope for 760-770. Still, I would like to hear from someone with a similar experience, someone who can map his/her veritas score to the real one.

Show Tags

05 May 2014, 11:03

3

This post receivedKUDOS

Glad to hear you're enjoying the test, Haik, and congratulations on achieving so much success with them! A few thoughts on scoring reliability:

-Our tests are administered and scored using Item Response Theory (the same system that the GMAT and GRE use), and so both user ability and question difficulty is determined using our ~4.5 million user responses in the system. That's why we've been able to enjoy such (relatively) accurate scoring - we're not guessing at question difficulty via "easy/medium/hard," but instead using the same kind of data-driven system that powers all the official tests.

-Similar to the official tests, though, the data is a little less robust at the ends of the bell curves. The folks at GMAC have admitted that they're less confident in the accuracy of a 750 vs. a 770 than they are in the accuracy of a 650 vs. 670, and we'd have to admit the same. Given that most users will at some point see 650-level questions (whether they're 700 level but missed a couple "easy" ones or they're a 600 level but got a few hard ones right), but significantly fewer will see the 750-level questions, the data just isn't as powerful at the poles.

-Pursuant to that...I just went into the system to check the error margins on your tests, and as I'd kind of expect you're probably looking at a 40-50 point standard error on those as opposed to the normal ~30. So I'd probably take from your test that you're "poised to score well above 700" but not necessarily that you're a 790 scorer.

-Anecdotally, I trust our quant scores almost to the exact point...I've had students take as many as 10 quant sections with really accurate scoring each time and congruent to their test day scores. Verbal is just a little less precise, in large part because the item difficulty and user abilities are all calculated using user stats, and those verbal skills haven't quite produced as concrete of IRT data curves as the quant skills have (which, as I've read in academic literature, is what a lot of these tests find, too). So I've recommended to my own students that they take their verbal score with a few points on either side as a range, whereas their quant score is something that they can be very, very confident in. The overall net effect is that the scores have been even more accurate than we would have predicted when we started, but particularly at the upper limits that "within 30 points" stat widens just a little bit largely due to an increased verbal error margin.

Show Tags

Hey Haik, one more thought: It's very normal to get a number of questions wrong and still get a very high score. Think about how a computer-adaptive test works: It's supposed to give you questions that are appropriate given your estimated ability level. If you get everything right, then the questions aren't hard enough! This is even true for very high scores -- no one is expected to get EVERY question right!

Show Tags

04 Jun 2014, 04:34

3

This post receivedKUDOS

FYI, I have taken the exam today. The total score is 760 (Q50, V44)&IR 7. I feel that I could have scored higher on quant, but nonetheless, given that English is my third (if any) language, this is also a great score

VeritasPrep tests are probably the best in terms of the content. Verbal score may sometimes be inflated, but the questions, especially in the quantitative section, were very similar to the actual ones. Kudos to the VeritasPrep team. Guys, you are awesome

MGMAT and GmatClub also offer great tests, but their value is in the difficulty of the questions rather than proximity to the actual exam. Do not take their scores seriously and concentrate on studying the material and tricks through these tests.

Show Tags

I would like to have, if possible, your input from your experience on the real GMAT test and the veritas tests:

My understanding is that the quant veritas test is so similar to the real GMAT test. Is this related to the content of the questions, the score, or both?

In connection with the verbal section: In which subsection (CR, RC, SC) the difference is the more obvious between the veritas test and the real GMAT test?

What do you think about the scoring of the verbal section on the veritas test?

Finally, in your opinion, the real GMAT verbal questions are the most similar to which material products? Did you have the occasion to work of the comprehension list of the SC, CR and RC published on this site? Is there a similarity between the questions of those lists and the real GMAT you took?

Many thanks for your input and your help on this!

My score on the veritas tests are the following: 700, 690, 690, 660,660 and 660. The quant is between 47 and 48 and the verbal is between 33 and 38 (the difference on the verbal score depends on a good level om my physical state when i took those tests)

Show Tags

My understanding is that the quant veritas test is so similar to the real GMAT test. Is this related to the content of the questions, the score, or both?

In my opinion, Veritas quant closely resembles to the real test both in the content and scoring. However, note that I have used other sources as well in my preparation. Do not rely solely on Veritas tests, rather use them as a valid estimator.

camo wrote:

In connection with the verbal section: In which subsection (CR, RC, SC) the difference is the more obvious between the veritas test and the real GMAT test?

What do you think about the scoring of the verbal section on the veritas test?

In terms of the content the Veritas verbal section was not different from the real test, at least for me. Although, the scoring of verbal section was sometimes inflated, I think you should not be concerned with that, since you score in 70-80th percentiles, for which there are plenty of questions. The score is distorted only for very high percentiles, i.e. 98,99, because the system lacks data for very tough questions.

camo wrote:

Finally, in your opinion, the real GMAT verbal questions are the most similar to which material products? Did you have the occasion to work of the comprehension list of the SC, CR and RC published on this site? Is there a similarity between the questions of those lists and the real GMAT you took?

I will repeat myself: Veritas questions are the most representative (of course, except of the official ones). Yet, use them in conjunction with Gmat Club tests and Manhattan, because these are really useful to build stamina and learn the concepts.

camo wrote:

Many thanks for your input and your help on this!

My score on the veritas tests are the following: 700, 690, 690, 660,660 and 660. The quant is between 47 and 48 and the verbal is between 33 and 38 (the difference on the verbal score depends on a good level om my physical state when i took those tests)

Show Tags

Show Tags

15 Jun 2014, 05:22

VeritasPrepBrian wrote:

Glad to hear you're enjoying the test, Haik, and congratulations on achieving so much success with them! A few thoughts on scoring reliability:

-Our tests are administered and scored using Item Response Theory (the same system that the GMAT and GRE use), and so both user ability and question difficulty is determined using our ~4.5 million user responses in the system. That's why we've been able to enjoy such (relatively) accurate scoring - we're not guessing at question difficulty via "easy/medium/hard," but instead using the same kind of data-driven system that powers all the official tests.

-Similar to the official tests, though, the data is a little less robust at the ends of the bell curves. The folks at GMAC have admitted that they're less confident in the accuracy of a 750 vs. a 770 than they are in the accuracy of a 650 vs. 670, and we'd have to admit the same. Given that most users will at some point see 650-level questions (whether they're 700 level but missed a couple "easy" ones or they're a 600 level but got a few hard ones right), but significantly fewer will see the 750-level questions, the data just isn't as powerful at the poles.

-Pursuant to that...I just went into the system to check the error margins on your tests, and as I'd kind of expect you're probably looking at a 40-50 point standard error on those as opposed to the normal ~30. So I'd probably take from your test that you're "poised to score well above 700" but not necessarily that you're a 790 scorer.

-Anecdotally, I trust our quant scores almost to the exact point...I've had students take as many as 10 quant sections with really accurate scoring each time and congruent to their test day scores. Verbal is just a little less precise, in large part because the item difficulty and user abilities are all calculated using user stats, and those verbal skills haven't quite produced as concrete of IRT data curves as the quant skills have (which, as I've read in academic literature, is what a lot of these tests find, too). So I've recommended to my own students that they take their verbal score with a few points on either side as a range, whereas their quant score is something that they can be very, very confident in. The overall net effect is that the scores have been even more accurate than we would have predicted when we started, but particularly at the upper limits that "within 30 points" stat widens just a little bit largely due to an increased verbal error margin.

I felt Veritas 700 level quant were the equivalent to MGMAT's 500 level.

I'm exploring the option of buying some more Veritas tests. However, this huge bump in my score makes me skeptical of the reliability.

Can someone pls. explain this bump in my score after 1 week of prep?

I won't make claims about the accuracy (or inaccuracy) of any other test prep companies' practice tests, but I would caution you against judging your score progress by looking at your score on one company's test and then comparing to how you later did on another company's test. Is it that the first test scored you too low? Did the second test score you too high? Did you truly improve that much over the past two weeks? It may be all of the above.

We at Veritas Prep are extremely confident about the score accuracy of our tests (and we have the data to back it up), so I am willing to say that you're much closer to 700 right now than to 600, assuming that you perform as well on test day. But, be careful with these comparisons!

Show Tags

12 Feb 2015, 09:02

Hello allIm planning to give my GMAT in June. I had given the veritas prep 1 week ago where my score was 690. In the next week, i gave the manhattan prep test in which my score was 630. Im a little confused about which test should i consider closer to my real score and how much more work should i put in. Hope to hear from u soon...